{
    "type": "FeatureCollection",
    "name": "site",
    "crs": {
        "type": "name",
        "properties": {
            "name": "EPSG:4326"
        }
    },
    "features": [
        {
            "type": "Feature",
            "geometry": {
                "type": "Point",
                "coordinates": [
                    30.550024,
                    25.479958
                ]
            },
            "properties": {
                "id": 6,
                "site_uri": "https:\/\/4care-skos.mf.no\/site\/6",
                "modern_name": "\u02bfAyn \u01e6all\u0101l",
                "ancient_name": "",
                "typology": "monastic settlement",
                "date_from": 0,
                "date_to": 0,
                "dating_criteria": "Analysis (in 2012, by Zulema Barahona Mendieta) of the ceramic fragments found in the excavation refuse.",
                "place_names": [
                    {
                        "language": "Arabic",
                        "pl_name": "\u0639\u064a\u0646 \u062c\u0644\u0651\u0627\u0644"
                    },
                    {
                        "language": "English",
                        "pl_name": "Ayn Gallal"
                    }
                ],
                "trismegistos_uri": "https:\/\/www.trismegistos.org\/place\/61706",
                "pleiades_uri": "",
                "paths_uri": "",
                "description": "\u02bfAyn \u01e6all\u0101l is a site in Kharga Oasis, situated 1.6km south of Dayr al-Ba\u01e7aw\u0101t and 600 m west of the northernmost documented remains of the ancient town of Hibis on the site of \u02bfAyn al-\u1e6curba. It consists of two sectors, one in the north and one in the south. Understood to have operated as a monastic complex, the site is part of the \u2018monastic belt\u2019 of Hibis formed along with Dayr al-Ba\u01e7aw\u0101t, Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101\u0161if and \u02bfAyn Sa\u02bfaf-East. The archaeological work carried out has been limited, and much of the documentation has been lost, severely limiting possible interpretations.Northern SectorThe interior fittings of the northern sector support the hypothesis that it functioned as a xenodocheion (Ghica 2012: 206). Included in this compound can be recognised the following spaces: a church with a single nave and double access, a baptistery with a baptismal font decorated with a painted crux ansata, as well as a number of bedrooms, kitchens, bread ovens, and rooms with undetermined uses. One of these rooms for which a sufficient interpretation could not be established, located in the N-E corner of the building, housed a number of late phase masonry tombs.Southern SectorThe southern sector is understood to have operated as a monastery, with at least two major construction phases identifiable. The compound includes a church with a basilical plan, equipped with an esonarthex, and likely a baptistery in the N-W corner. Additionally, in the S-E corner, there is an aedicule-topped dome, below which lies a crypt (Ghica 2012: 206). Like in the Northern Sector, there are also a number of bread ovens. Several staircases have been identified, and the thickness of the walls in the middle of the structure has led to the supposition that there was a tower, a typical architectural feature of monastic architecture.Unfortunately, due to the absence of stratigraphic excavation, datable material and radiocarbon dates, only architectural and decorative features can be considered as tools for dating the structures. The absence of a western return aisle in the church of the Southern Structure suggest an architectural traditional prior to the development of the Egyptian basilical plan in the fifth and sixth centuries (Ghica 2012: 208). Given certain similarities to the Western Church at Ismant al-\u1e2aar\u0101b (single nave of the church in the N sector), as well as the analysis of ceramics by Z. Barahona Mendieta, a fourth to fifth century foundation date has been given to the site (Ghica 2012: 210).",
                "archaeological_research": "The archaeological work conducted at this site has been very limited. The sites were partially cleared during a number of campaigns conducted in 1994-1996 and 2001. This work was carried out by the local inspectorate of the Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA), under the direction of \u02bfA. \u02bfA.\u1e2a. \u02bfAbd al-\u02bfAz\u012bz. Unfortunately, these excavations were never published and all the documentation that remains consists of a limited number of film photographs. A number of topographical surveys were carried out by the Institut français d’archéologie orientale in the following years: March and September of 2007, conducted by V. Ghica; September 2008, conducted by V. Ghica, D. Laisney and J. Westerfeld; and in January 2012, conducted by Z. Barahona Mendieta, Y. Béliez and V. Ghica (Ghica 2012: 206). The lack of material and of fallen walls observed during the excavations carried out by the SCA in the 1990’s have led to the inference that the site was perhaps excavated during the colonial period.\r\nThe crypt of the church in the southern sector was cleaned during the DEChriM mission conducted in Kharga in December 2022, which saw excavation work at Šams al-D\u012bn and Dayr Mu\u1e63\u1e6daf\u0101 K\u0101šif, as well as restoration work at D\u016bš. This crypt was already known thanks to the work of the local inspectorate, but there were no images of it, nor was there any information available with regards to its architectural features. Additionally, \u02bfA. \u02bfA.\u1e2a. \u02bfAbd al-\u02bfAz\u012bz informed us that the crypt contained a sarcophagus with a crux ansata which, again, there were no images of. These factors were reason enough to spend two days cleaning the space, permitting photography and thus to the creation of a photogrammtric model. Detailed images were taken of the sarcophagus, the head end of which was indeed inscribed with a crux ansata. More than this, however, the crux was bordered by a theta on the left and what seems to be either an omicron or simply a circle to the right. Remains of a second sarcophagus, or the lid of the first sarcophagus were also retrieved. Furthermore, a pile of disarticulated and badly waterlogged bones was identified along the western wall. These were too fragmentary and in too poor a state for the biological profile of the individual(s) to be determined. It is unclear as to whether the bones were already in this spot when the space was excavated by the Egyptian team or if they were discarded here before filling the space. ",
                "bibliography": "\u2022 Ghica, V. 2012. \u201cPour une histoire du christianisme dans le d\u00e9sert occidental d\u2019\u00c9gypte.\u201d Journal des savants 2: 189-280.\u2022\u00a0Ghica, V. 2016. \u201cVecteurs de la christianisation de l\u2019\u00c9gypte au IVe si\u00e8cle \u00e0 la lumi\u00e8re des sources arch\u00e9ologiques.\u201d In Acta XVI Congressus Internationalis Archaeologiae Christianae, Rome 22-28.9.2013, edited by O. Brandt and G. Castiglia, 247-249 & figs. 9d. and 9e. Citt\u00e0 del Vaticano: Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana.\u2022 Ghica, V. 2019. \u201cL\u2019arch\u00e9ologie du monachisme \u00e9gyptien au IVe si\u00e8cle: \u00c9tat de la question.\u201d In Nag Hammadi \u00e0 70 ans, qu\u2019avons-nous appris? Nag Hammadi at 70: What Have We Learned? Colloque international, Qu\u00e9bec, Universit\u00e9 Laval, 29-31 mai 2015, edited by E. Cr\u00e9gheur, L. Painchaud and T. Rasimus, 134-135. Leuven-Paris-Bristol: Peeters.",
                "external_links": [],
                "authors": [
                    {
                        "author": "Victor Ghica",
                        "year": "2020"
                    },
                    {
                        "author": "Rhiannon Williams",
                        "year": "2020"
                    }
                ]
            }
        }
    ]
}